a5c7b9f00b The Sheik who competed at the last Cannonball Run, is berated by his father for not winning it. So he tells him to go and win. Problem is that there is no Cannonball Run. So his father tells him to make one of his own. He puts up a million dollarsthe prize. So former Cannonballers J.J. and his buddy Vince join,does Blake and Fenderbaum and some other characters. But Blake and Fenderbaum owe a mobster some money, and the mobster owes some other guy more. He then decides to grab the Sheik and hold him for ransom so he can pay the guy back. The original characters from The Cannonball Run (1981) race across the country once more in various cars and trucks. This sequel is not all that bad but it is almost the same filmthe first but with different comical lines for the cast. So I like the movie but it&#39;s just notgoodthe original film.<br/><br/>The Cannonball Run II has it&#39;s own story so it&#39;s not exactly like the first movie. But you do have the same theme: an all-star cast, an illegal cross-country race, Burt Reynolds, car chases and wrecks and some cheesy fun comedy - in that way it is like the very first film.<br/><br/>Needless to say, if you liked the first film or the Smokey and the Bandit series then you might like The Cannonball Run II.<br/><br/>5/10 This film was really no better or worse than the original, it was essentially more of the same old stuff. Hal Needham still finds plenty of opportunities to fill the screen with stunts and there are several scenes of cars crashing through walls, flying in the air and dragging along entire houses with them, but the race has absolutely no urgency - at times you even forget there IS a race! The participants just don&#39;t seem very interested in winning. Maybe the movie is worth seeing just because it&#39;s your only chance to see Frank Sinatra, Richard Kiel and Jackie Chan in the same picture, but don&#39;t expect to see them doing anything important; the wandering script understandably gets lost among all those famous players, and the good moments are few and far between. (*1/2) If you aren't feeling so generous, it's pretty obvious that the movie is not only a stinker but an inexcusably corrupt stinker, dependent on the indulgence of a public slavish or naive enough to feel honored when old pros content themselves with smugly amateurish shtik. [29 June 1984, p.B5]
Erapdiate Admin replied
347 weeks ago